They are thinking that Offshore Wind might still make it in Maine.

Comment

Comment by Eric A. Tuttle on August 24, 2015 at 10:09am

 Just think, if we doubled the efficiency of use, or cut by half the use, even if those figures were 100% correct, they would be allowed to double the rates to meet their long term contracts. The largest user of electricity is Waste. Electric water heaters sitting idle, when on demand, or solar assist could be utilized. Motors running idle in industry when controlled Variable Speed drives save power vs a clutch engaged system, heat from lights (use approx 80% of electricity goes to heat that AC's must cool in summer) Lighting use when not needed, (room sensors (not motion but people counters of entry or exit counts))

We have the ability to control Wasted energy. It is the will to do so we lack. 

One project I proposed, involving Variable Speed motor controllers, where the initial cost was $57,000 for 19 30Hp motors, with a payback requirement of 6 months provided the company their investment return in 28 days. A savings of $627,000 savings for the ensuing 11 months. An immediate attempt to replace conventional systems became their goal where practical.

There are many things that could be done, to stall this onslaught of un-needed waste and destruction. There are those that will try to sell half-A**ed products with claims of savings. Though they will do a partial job, Industry has the ability to do the maximum job possible, "Today".

Until we Demand that this technology be put to use, at a reasonable justifiable replacement expense to the consumer, this cycle will continue.

Until we Demand, Receive, and put to use this available technology in the safest possible way, for both human and environment, further creation of new (not replacement) energy facilities should halt. 

Comment by Brad Blake on August 23, 2015 at 11:11pm

Paula, I don't recall where in the last 6 years of battling the wind scourge I have picked this up, but I saved this rebuttal.

o        69MW x 20% = 13.8MW
13.8MW x 8760 hours in a year = 120,888 MWh
120,888 MWh / 11.04 MWh per household per year = 10,950 US households

That calculation is per U.S. Dept of Energy! See the nifty output calculator (lie detector!) at:
http://www.ppdlw.org/calculato...

Furthermore, the Wind Industry LOVES quoting how many households will be served because if you live in a town with 10,950 households you automatically think it'll provide all the needs of your town. You've just fallen into the Wind Industry's trap! There are two major flaws in this calculation that CAN NOT be ignored:

First, they have you imagining a constant, reliable flow of electricity. Wind generated electricity is neither. No one in their right mind would try to provide a town's power using only wind power. Wind is seasonal. Wind varies from day to day. Wind varies hour by hour. Man does not control the wind (duh!) so man would have to adjust his electricity use to suit wind conditions. Imagine this conversation:
"Are you going to watch the Super Bowl next Sunday?"
"I'd like to but it depends on whether it's windy enough for my TV to work."

Second, once the Wind Industry has you thinking of households, you relate that number to your own town. But you probably ignore your town's biggest users of electricity: businesses, industry, municipal buildings, schools, hospitals, street lighting, other utilities, even traffic lights.

So the next time a wind developer or lawyer (sorry to repeat myself) quotes how many households he'll power, tell him you're not the moron he assumes you to be! Educate yourself and help stop the lies that are going to destroy Maine's beauty and #1 industry: tourism!

Comment by Paula D Kelso on August 23, 2015 at 9:14pm

Hey, will someone who knows these things figure out how they come up with figures like enough electricy to power 6,000 homes. And an electric bill of $82. What average consumption are they assuming? Don't know about anyone else but our 2-person household uses over 1,000 kw a month at a cost of between $180 and $220. (Emera) And we heat with a propane boiler. (Don't ask what that costs us.) And what is this b.s. about Maine having strong winds and the grid being close? I'd like to see a responsible media report on the true cost of this wind scam on the homeowner's electric bill. If I'm thinking of this right, 24 cents for the electricity plus a big jump in the transmission and distribution costs equals a situation for us like for those in Germany and other countries who are now facing unaffordable electric bills. Used to be when electric rates went up you heard about in the news, now you maybe get a notice with your bill or if you aren't looking just think your using more. Now why would some Japanese company come to Maine to put up wind turbines? Obviously, so they can make money off us poor fools. So much for electricity being an 'essential service'. Which one assumes would be produced and delivered at the most economical cost to the customers. Isn't that why we have a PUC? To watch out for our interests?

 

I'm chemically senstive and avoid petroleum products like the plague (that propane boiler is in an unattached building). My health and those not so bad off would be greatly improved if we could all heat with electricity and run our cars off electricity. But the destruction of our State and the disregard for it's people by wind turbines (even offshore) won't move us one bit closer to the day when our air is less polluted. But it will move us a whole lot closer to the day when the cost of energy lowers our standard of living and forces people to make very difficult choices.

Comment by Eric A. Tuttle on August 23, 2015 at 4:14pm

And The Gulf of Maine certainly has a lot of "Near Perfect" storms.

Comment by Brad Blake on August 23, 2015 at 2:49pm

There would be no research into offshore wind designs if the Obama administration wasn't pushing billions of dollars to this special interest, adding debt to the $18 trillion National Debt for something that has no economic feasibility and is not needed.  It is a despicable waste of taxpayer money.
It is not until deep into this article that Mr. Turkel brings to the readers' attention that the Block Island project has a PPA that begins at 24¢.  Begins.  He doesn't mention the built in 3.5% annual indexing in that contract, nor compare that to the average wholesale electricity price in ISO-NE that is a quarter of that cost.  If a fixed monopole wind project in shallow water, using existing technology costs that much, including all the grants, tax breaks, subsidies, selling Enron-inspired RECs, etc.  costs that much, it is mind boggling to think of the cost of floating deep water turbines that have to be designed to withstand the forces greater than "The Perfect Storm" that ravaged the Gulf of Maine in October 1991.  Otherwise, we create a multi-billion dollar scrapheap at the bottom of the ocean.